If you go to any Indymedia site, you'll notice that on the left hand side is a column listing and linking to all the sites in the Indymedia family - from Bristol (UK) to Chiapas (Mexico) to Ontario (Canada): There are IMCs in every major continent on the planet (expect Antarctica!) and the list is growing. But if you look at the European list you'll notice a missing site - IndyCymru is not there. This begs the question - why has IndyCymru become estranged from the rest of the family?

At the heart of the issue is the idea of open publishing - Media 2.0 if you like - this is the attempt to decentrailise and de-mystify the media. To change the very idea of media from the preserve of the few to the right of the many. The global IMC endorses the following definition of this idea: Open publishing means that the process of creating news is transparent to the readers. They can contribute a story and see it instantly appear in the pool of stories publicly available. Those stories are filtered as little as possible to help the readers find the stories they want. Readers can see editorial decisions being made by others. They can see how to get involved and help make editorial decisions. If they can think of a better way for the software to help shape editorial decisions, they can copy the software because it is free and change it and start their own site. If they want to redistribute the news, they can, preferably on an open publishing site.

This idea of 'contribute a story and see it instantly appear in the pool of stories publicly available' is important, for while all IMC retain the ability to 'hide' stories from the newswire, the basic and enshrined approach is to attempt to interferes as little as possible. That's not to say that there are not editorial guidelines - and this is where the transparency idea in the definition above comes in - you need to be able to see the guidelines, and get involved in shaping them. No IMC is perfect - far from it the fractious and sometimes chaotic nature of much of the IMC movement is a reflection of many of the people who are building this movement. That aside the movement is growing and growing - and most importantly - it is a parallel structure where, in the on 60s jargon, the workers own the means on production - as well as that of distribution! As the IMC Membership Criteria draft states:

- Have a committed membership substantial enough to sustain a functional
IMC.
- Have open and public meetings (no one group can have exclusionary "ownership" of an IMC).
- Work toward developing a local Mission Statement or Statement of Purpose. Network Mission Statement may be adopted or used on an interim basis.
- Establish and publish an editorial policy which is developed and functions through democratic process, and with full transparency.
- Agree to the use of Open Publishing as described in the NIMC Editorial Policy.

IndyCymru does not follow either of these fundamental principles. It is not an open newswire for several reasons - first you need to register to be able to contribute (something other IMCs do not ask for) and each post goes to a moderator to approval before it can enter the newswire (again, something that other IMCs do not do - article go straight to the newswire). I have searched the site in vain to find a copy of the moderation guidelines (they may be there, but it does not bode well if a visitor cannot see them!) Even if I did find them, how would I get involved to influence the path of the site? I also could not see any mention of where an up and coming meeting for the site is - the only reference I could find was a post on Sunday, October 12th 2003 - where prospective IMCers were invited to submit their details - which is not really akin to an open meeting.

Some at IndyCymru are looking at the 'Portuguese Statement' as a model for operation (if this related to how the Portuguese IMC operates, then they do thing very differently from IndyCmyru as they do not require people to be members to submit articles and do not moderate the articles before they are posted) - though I have been unable to find a reference to the Portuguese Statement, if anyone know a link to it - that would help (If IndyCmyru is following this approach, surly a link to the site to it would be a good idea?)

As a test I submitted an article on IndyCymru - the submissions page warned me that 'Be advised that not all submissions will be posted.' I could not find any reference to guidelines that would tell my what criteria this moderation operates on. This is preparation to submitting this article – hopefully it will get though the moderation barrier.

Make no mistake - there is a global and local media war going on, a battle for hearts and minds - to fight this battle using the tools of the enemy - centralisation and control - it to loose it before we have begun.

Part of the reason I have written this article is in annoyance at the IndyCymru moderator Ilyan who posted and added to an article which insinuates that Bristol IMC is being run either by MI5 or Politically Correct Fascists. This type of unfounded and unhelpful lashing out at a supposed fellow IMC has spawned other (or possibly the same) posters who see IndyCymru as some kind of martyr/s for a cause: "I don't know...Ilyan, and have no particular brief....but I think that Indymedia should have been more transparent and given an explanation on the UK Indymedia front page when the Indycymru link was removed." I know Bristol IMC is not perfect, and I’m writing this in a personal capacity – but wtf is this paranoia trip going to achieve? BIMC is moving forwards, is transparent, is doing well and I feel we should be proud a the achievement.